STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                                  JAMAICA, NY 11433

          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.: DL110068RO

                    Sergie/Mary Barhave,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.: DG110716S


          On December 26, 1989, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on 
          November 27, 1989, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the 
          housing accommodation known as 138-24 68th Drive, Kew Gardens 
          Hills, N.Y., Apt. 75-A, wherein the Administrator determined that 
          a reduction in rent was warranted based upon a reduction in 

          The Rent Administrator also directed full restoration of services.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and 
          has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the 
          issues raised by the administrative appeal.

          The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly reduced 
          the rent of the subject apartment.

          On July 11, 1989, the tenant filed a complaint alleging that the 
          owner failed to maintain certain services in the subject apartment.

          The owner filed an answer to the complaint alleging, in pertinent 
          part, that the tenant did not provide access to the maintenance 
          workers to perform the needed repairs. 

          A DHCR inspection conducted on November 10, 1989, revealed that 
          although certain service deficiencies had been corrected, the small 
          bedroom light fixture had been removed which exposed worn and 
          frayed wiring. 

          On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that 
          the tenant was either refusing or delaying access to the subject 


          apartment and that this prevented the owner from correcting all 
          service deficiencies.

          The petition was served on the tenant on March 13, 1990.

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal 
          should be denied.

          The Commissioner has considered the owner's argument that access to 
          the subject apartment was delayed or denied and rejects this 
          argument.  The file shows clearly that the owner's employees gained 
          access to the subject apartment on several prior occasions and 
          completed sundry repairs in a workmanlike manner.

          Moreover, the owner had almost four (4) months from service of the 
          tenant's complaint until the issuance of the Administrator's order 
          to investigate the tenant's complaint and to make necessary 
          repairs, but the owner failed to do so.

          Policy Statement 90-5 (Arranging Repairs; No Access Inspections) 

               When the owner receives the copy of the tenant's complaint 
               from DHCR, the owner has twenty (20) days in which to respond.  
               If the owner asserts that he or she is unable to gain access 
               during this time, this fact should be included in the 
               response.  In order to obtain a "no-access" inspection, the 
               owner should then submit to the DHCR copies of two letters to 
               the tenant attempting to arrange access dates.  Each of these 
               letters must be mailed at least eight days before the proposed 
               date for access and the second letter must be sent by 
               certified mail, return receipt requested.  The return receipt 
               must also be submitted with the request for a "no access" 

          The Commissioner also finds that the owner failed to comply with 
          the requirements of Policy Statement 90-5 as set forth above.  
          Accordingly, the Administrator properly relied on the entire 
          evidence in the record, including the results of the November 10, 
          1989, inspection which confirmed the existence of a defective 
          condition warranting a rent reduction.

          Accordingly, the Administrator's order based on the inspection was 

          The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted 
          by the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of this 
          order and opinion.


          Upon a restoration of services, the owner may separately apply for 
          rent restoration.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, 
          it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and 
          that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, 


                                             LULA M. ANDERSON
                                             Deputy Commissioner  


TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name